The Amish are actually a good example, they live quite differently today than they used to in the past and they’re starting to embrace non-indigenous technology; some examples include more use of things like cellphones and motorcycles. If given 100 years, would the Amish still live as they do today? It’s very likely in my opinion that they won’t. There have been many ultra-conservative religious movements in the world that persisted for centuries and then died out in a single generation due to changing factors in the external world.
OK, I’ll be clearer: the Amish are a closed subculture within the U.S. Inside the Amish little world it is very difficult to learn about other ways of living. Outside of the Amish little world, but still within the U.S., you find the tremendously complicated, varied, and unpredictable chaos that is normal society, where you can see both the borders of other closed subcultures (e.g. underground crime syndicates, elite social clubs, or Druze) and the cross-pollination between relatively more open subcultures (e.g. hipsters, emos, goths, surfer dudes, straight-edge punks, Harley-Davidson riders, tattooists, backpackers, metalheads, otakus and LARPers all hanging out with each other) which together constitute the “normal.”
Inside the Amish little world it is very difficult to learn about other ways of living.
This is not true. Amish do not live in gated communities. They are in daily contact with normal (albeit rural) American life.
hipsters, emos, goths, surfer dudes, straight-edge punks, Harley-Davidson riders, tattooists, backpackers, metalheads, otakus and LARPers all hanging out with each other
That’s not true either. They don’t.
In any case, your claim was “More children of conservatives does not equal more conservative people”. There are a lot more Amish and Amish are definitely “conservative people”. Why are there more Amish?
I googled it again, (I really need to start organising bookmarks more) and the first two sources I found both said religiosity/spirituality is 40-50% genetic.
Now, this doesn’t mean that the actual ideas are genetic, but unless children are separated from parents at birth they will pass on memes too. Its also possible that in a secular environment, people with a genetic tendency towards religion will adopt a quasi-religious attitude towards philosophies or politics.
It is also possible that in some places, current world religions loose out memetically before the religious genes take over, and the future theocracy could be some kinda new-age religion. I’m not saying its likely, but I am pointing out that I’m not arguing that specific ideas are genetic, only that traits such as religiosity are.
More children of conservatives does not equal more conservative people. For the godzillionth time: transmission of ideas is not genetic.
Amish population grew by about 120% between 1992 and 2013. Do you think their ideas are that attractive..?
The Amish are actually a good example, they live quite differently today than they used to in the past and they’re starting to embrace non-indigenous technology; some examples include more use of things like cellphones and motorcycles. If given 100 years, would the Amish still live as they do today? It’s very likely in my opinion that they won’t. There have been many ultra-conservative religious movements in the world that persisted for centuries and then died out in a single generation due to changing factors in the external world.
The Amish intentionally restrict their children’s exposure to foreign ideas. That’s less achievable in normal society.
Define “normal”. US looks pretty normal to me :-/
OK, I’ll be clearer: the Amish are a closed subculture within the U.S. Inside the Amish little world it is very difficult to learn about other ways of living. Outside of the Amish little world, but still within the U.S., you find the tremendously complicated, varied, and unpredictable chaos that is normal society, where you can see both the borders of other closed subcultures (e.g. underground crime syndicates, elite social clubs, or Druze) and the cross-pollination between relatively more open subcultures (e.g. hipsters, emos, goths, surfer dudes, straight-edge punks, Harley-Davidson riders, tattooists, backpackers, metalheads, otakus and LARPers all hanging out with each other) which together constitute the “normal.”
This is not true. Amish do not live in gated communities. They are in daily contact with normal (albeit rural) American life.
That’s not true either. They don’t.
In any case, your claim was “More children of conservatives does not equal more conservative people”. There are a lot more Amish and Amish are definitely “conservative people”. Why are there more Amish?
From Wikipedia:
Rumspringa notwithstanding, the Amish way of life has several built-in features that repel modern influences without needing physical fences to do so.
Well, of course. That’s how a culture survives without being melted down in a pot. In a certain sense, that’s what makes it “conservative”.
I googled it again, (I really need to start organising bookmarks more) and the first two sources I found both said religiosity/spirituality is 40-50% genetic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity#Genes_and_environment http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-08/what-twins-reveal-about-god-gene
Now, this doesn’t mean that the actual ideas are genetic, but unless children are separated from parents at birth they will pass on memes too. Its also possible that in a secular environment, people with a genetic tendency towards religion will adopt a quasi-religious attitude towards philosophies or politics.
It is also possible that in some places, current world religions loose out memetically before the religious genes take over, and the future theocracy could be some kinda new-age religion. I’m not saying its likely, but I am pointing out that I’m not arguing that specific ideas are genetic, only that traits such as religiosity are.